No abstract

Background The extent to which patients are involved in their care can be influenced by hospital policies and interventions. Nevertheless, the implementation of patient participation and involvement (PPI) at the organisational (meso) level has rarely been assessed systematically. The aim of this study was to assess the occurrence of PPI practises in hospitals in Belgium, France, Germany and Luxembourg and to analyze if, and to what extent, the hospital vision and the presence of a patient committee influence the implementation of PPI practises. Methods A cross-sectional study was carried out using an online questionnaire in hospitals in the border regions of the four countries. The data were analyzed for differences between regions and the maturity of PPI development. Results Full responses were obtained from 64 hospitals. A wide range of practices were observed, the degree of maturity was mixed. A majority of hospitals promoted patient partnership in the hospital’s philosophy of care statement. However, the implementation of specific interventions for PPI was not found uniformly and differences could be observed between the countries. Conclusions Hospitals in the region seem to be motivated to include patients more fully, however, implementation of PPI interventions seems incomplete and only partially integrated into the general functioning of the hospitals. The implementation of the concept seems to be more mature in the francophone part of the region perhaps due, in part, to a more favourable political context.

Healthcare has long been marked by the authoritative-physician–passive-patient interaction, with patients seeking help and physicians seeking to restore patients back to health. However, globalisation, social movements, and technological advancements are transforming the nature of this relationship. We aim to identify core values that influence the power dynamic between patients and healthcare professionals, and determine how to steer these interactions towards partnership, a more suitable approach to current healthcare needs. Patients with chronic diseases (10 men, 18 women) and healthcare professionals (11 men, 12 women) were interviewed, sessions transcribed, and the framework method used to thematically analyse the data. Validation was done through analyst triangulation and member check recheck. Core values identified as influencing the patient-healthcare professional power dynamic include: (A) values that empower patients (acceptance of diagnosis and autonomy); (B) values unique to healthcare professionals (HCPs) (acknowledging patients experiential knowledge and including patients in the therapeutic process); and (C) shared capitals related to their interactions (communication, information sharing and exchange, collaboration, and mutual commitment). These interdependent core values can be considered prerequisites to the implementation of the patient-as-partner approach in healthcare. Partnership would imply a paradigm shift such that stakeholders systematically examine each other’s perspective, motivations, capabilities, and goals, and then adapt their interactions in this accord, for optimal outcome.

Introduction Recently, the literature has promoted the use of patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) in clinical practice as a means to foster patient engagement. However, conditions necessary to support the use of PROMs to encourage asthma patient engagement are not clearly defined. Therefore, we sought (1) to explore the current and ideal use of PROMs by healthcare professionals (HP) in specialized asthma management centers in French‐speaking Belgium and (2) to understand under which conditions the use of PROMs contributes to patient engagement. Methods We undertook a mixed‐methods study with both anonymous online survey and in‐person qualitative semi‐structured interviews conducted with HPs to understand their perspectives on the routine use of PROMs. HPs were recruited from 16 asthma centers (French‐speaking Belgium) identified via the Belgian Respiratory Society. Results Of the 170 HPs identified from the 16 participating centers, 51 (30%) responded to the survey ( n = 51) and 11 completed semi‐structured interviews. 53% (27/51) of the surveyed HPs reported using PROMs primarily for asthma monitoring and clinical research while all reported that PROMs should primarily be used in practice to facilitate communication with the patient and to address neglected aspects of the care relationship such as the psychosocial aspects of the disease. The qualitative interviews revealed avenues for moving from a medical‐centered and utilitarian use of PROMs to a use serving patient engagement. This would require HPs to go beyond their current representation of PROMs, to use instruments offering a more holistic image of the patient, to incorporate PROMs into a digital tool and to integrate PROMs in a patient education process. Conclusion The main findings of this study suggest relevant avenues for using PROMs in ways that support patient engagement.